Interesting Site: Wheeled vs. Tracked AFV (US)

[Backis]

JaM said:
Compare stats in encykolaedia between Zelda M113 and US Stryker.I know that this is the game and not a reality, but it will give you simple view of Stryker capabilities

Gee, the end-all game encyclopedia, if THAT says the M113 is in everything more versatile it must be so...

Except that it wouldn't and it doesn't.

You didn't state that you thought it "was better in the game", you stated;

In everything, they are more versatile.

Which is inherently false.

it is nothing more than BTR-80...

Gee... its a wheeled APC, M113 is a tracked APC... I guess thats so much better.

We are comparing two APC's here... one tracked, one wheeled, one designed in the 1950's, one "somewhat" later...

I'd say that its most likely the BTR-80 also would be superior to the M113 in this role...

Except for the rear engine and those crampy small side doors that is...

Why do you think Israelis declined Strykers for service?

The only reason they even inquired about the Styker was that they could use US funds to buy them, even then they were to gold-plated and expensive.

Sooner US Army will fight like Israel Army (urban area fighting) with Heavy APCs,

Yeah, the Israelis sure have pacified the Palestinians.

Oh, wait a minute...

I guess they US should hunker down, use the IDF methods and stay for, oh, thirty years, getting nowhere?

To begin with Palestinians have nowhere near the amount of heavy weaponry that is available to Iraqi insurgents.

I dont understand, why they looking for own way if there is a working solution...

Only in your dreams... IDF also suffer casualties in this type of op, Iraq is just on a much larger scale.

1. Spall liner protects infantry inside M113, it more RPG resistant than Stryker, with add on armor from Israelis could be RPG imune, M113 is better agains IED, antiinfantry mines cant stop it (stryker will be stopped - mobility kill)

Oh, I guess only the M113 have a spalling liner...

Actually most vehicles, including Stryker, has thosew nowadays...

And there is no "RPG immune" armour package for the M113. You shouldn't use "RPG" in that statement since it makes it meaningless.

Its actually more difficult to MK a Stryker than a M113. All you need to do that to a M113 is to make it throw a track. There have been cases where a Stryker have been hit by large IED's and been able to drive home with several wheel wells blown off. In that situation the M113 would need to have been towed out...

You can completely destroy several wheels on a Stryker with it retaining mobility, while knocking off one track on the M113 will completely immobilize it.

Most photographs of burnt out Strykers are of vehicles that have been hit and then been abandoned because stowage discipline has been bad and extra fuel carried outside the vehicle, leading to to vehicle being set on fire.

Here is whats left of an M113 that has been on fire...

http://www.undermars.com/images/mars0340.jpg

Lets focus on this though;

M113 is better agains IED

Feeling up to support this claim?

Wheeled vehicles are inherently more resistant to under body detonations due to increased standoff from the ground and better venting of the blast, that is a simple fact.

The Stryker is designed with IED's and mines in mind, the M113 was not. Why is it superior in this area?

Luck?

Most casualties however are from unbuttoned personell. Both the Stryker and M113 will be unbuttoned with heads up in most situations (situational awareness is important enough to ensure that for a couple of more decades), so there is no real difference here except against big detonations.

Practical level of protection for the M113 and M1114 are the same. Both stop all but the worst IED fragments. Both stop 7.62mm API, neither will stop PG-7M. The M113 can stop 12.7 frontally, which is a small advantage, but the mobility advantage of the M1114 definately outweighes this.

2.72km/h is not slow,With tracks you can go offroad even in bad terain, stryker cant.

72kph? Well, if you add all the extra motive improvements available, remove the spalling liner and forego extra armour packages, maybe... and don't load up to much gear and find a long nice downhill stretch of road...

Otherwise closer to 50.

M113s are unable to keep up with wheeled convoys who routinely hold 100kph throughout their routes. All other problems I mentioned with being slower remains.

Strykers, M1114 and M1117 gives as equal or better protection to all relevant threats (smallarms, IED) while still being loads faster and better at responding/reacting to emerging threats.

All types including MBT share vulnerabilities against large IED and various RPG rounds

The whole convoy has to slow down and increase exposure time.

Tracked vehicles do generally have an advantage in tactical mobility but they are disadvantage in long distance road marches.

And you state that the Stryker can't drive in terrain at all?

Its not a frickin school bus dude.

ABSOLUTES is your enemy dude...

3.Fuel comsumtion s not so high as you think

Enough to make a difference. Tracked vehicles also demand more maintenance, but please, feel free to ignore reality again.

4.better protection compensate this.

Marginally better protection against a HMG kinetic threat that isn't there...

"RPG immunity", whatever that means, exist only in your mind

look at thelink posted there...

Why don't you just start calling it Gavin too... the guy is a crackpot.


Btw, how about retracting...

In everything, they are more versatile.

...to begin with?

You're maiking my job EASY. I don't have to prove that the Stryker is generally superior (I wouldn't try, they are good at different jobs, but with advantages to the Stryker for being so much younger), but pushing down this bombastic claim is no hard at all...

A hint, go to tanknet.org and do a search on M113. There are people there who actually served on M113 and Strykers.

its not the end-all of wisdom, but its a good place to start.